Risk Attributes of Labor and
its Management Practices
from Farmers’ Perspective:
Implications for
Educational Programs
Vera Bitsch
Michigan State University
HRM Risk Projects

Horticultural operations
Greenhouse,
tree nursery,
landscape operations
Dairy farmers
 Pork producers

Structure of Projects
Contacts, partners
 Focus group discussions
 Case studies
 Workshops
 Review, publications

Uses of Focus Groups
Informed decision making
 Product, program development
 Customer satisfaction
 Input in planning and goal setting
 Conveying client focus
 Needs assessment
 Quality improvement effort
 Policy making and testing
(Krueger and Casey, 2000)

Focus Group Discussion Defined
Data on a topic defined and
structured by a researcher
gathered through group
interaction
(Morgan, 1996)
 Resource efficient and flexible
data collection method

Projects’ Focus Groups

Number of
participants/meeting
8 in horticulture groups
 5.5 in dairy groups
 4 in pork groups


Segmentation variables
Location
 Production focus
 Other (pork only)

Projects’ Focus Groups Cont.

Number of meetings
depends on
number
of segmentation
variables
theoretical saturation

Number of meetings
5 in horticulture
 4 in dairy
 4+2 in pork

Data Collection, Analysis
Participant recruiting,
facilitation, observation
 1-page questionnaire
 Recording & transcripts
 Coding & interpretation
 Group summaries &
aggregation

Focus Group Participants

Demographics
 Mostly
male
 Age 22-67 yrs.
 In current position 15 (hort), resp.
18 yrs. (dairy, pork)



Dairy: (co)owners
Hort: 1:1 hired managers/owners
Pork: 1:3 hired managers/owners
Farm Sizes of Participants

Hort industry
 Gross
sales $100k-$70 mil.
 Largest: 1,600 people

Dairy industry
 Milk
sales $400k-$14 mil.
 Largest: 55 people

Pork industry
 Gross
revenue $980K-35 mil.
 Largest: 110 people
Summary of Focus Group Results
Differences, commonalities
 Small producers, contractors
little interest
 Senior managers
 Middle managers
 Perception of training needs

Top Topics based on Pork Groups

Performance mgt
 Info
#, goal setting, meetings,
peer pressure
 Employees with baggage, lack
of communication

Compensation
 Competitive
wages, benefits,
perks, defined bonus
 Unclear system, lack of
benefits, wage ceilings
Important Topics

Recruitment
 Through
networks, using services,
hire extra
 Entry level hiring, location

Training
 Patience,
hands-on, varied, safety
training
 Send “into the fire”

Working conditions
 Job
matching, rotation
 Farm hours, flat orgs
Other Topics

Selection
 Criteria,
tools
 Pressure to hire

Immigrant or foreign employees
 Willing,
able workforce
 Lack of communication, conflict

Discipline
 Coaching,
formal process
 Not using a process
Other Topics Cont.

Performance evaluation
 Clear
communication, formal
 Not explicit, ambiguous

Social environment
 Flex.
team assignmts, meetings
 Disrespect by coworkers

Labor laws
 Use
specialists, knowledge
 Concerns, critique
Structure of Pork Manager Workshop








Selection
Training
Evaluation
Compensation
Conflict management
Discipline and termination
Communication
Motivation
Pork Workshop Participants &
Evaluation
Survey vs. in-depth
 KS: 19 participants
 MI: 27 participants
 Overall rating: 7.9 out of 10
 Issues

Location, time, duration
 Speakers, costs

Thanks to




North Central Risk Management
Education Center
Michigan Risk Partnership
Project GREEEN at MSU
S. Fogleman, S. Harsh, many
other team members and
consultants at MSU and beyond